ISSN 2083-6473
ISSN 2083-6481 (electronic version)




Associate Editor
Prof. Tomasz Neumann

Published by
TransNav, Faculty of Navigation
Gdynia Maritime University
3, John Paul II Avenue
81-345 Gdynia, POLAND
www http://www.transnav.eu
e-mail transnav@umg.edu.pl
Legal Analysis of the U.S. Supreme Court Position Upon a Safe Berth Warranty and Evaluation of the UK Legal Position
1 University of Piraeus, Pireas, Greece
ABSTRACT: This research is focused upon the evaluation of safe berth clause pursuant to US law, in conjunction with UK law, based on the recent US Supreme Court ruling over “ATHOS I”, which was fixed pursuant to an ASBATANKVOY charterparty to carry a cargo of heavy crude oil from Venezuela to Paulsboro, New Jersey. The dispute arose during the final stretch of the voyage, as the vessel entered the Delaware River, an uncharted abandoned ship anchor ruptured the vessel’s hull causing 264,000 gallons of oil to spill. The Oil Pollution Act 1990 required the Owners to fund the clean-up costs in the first instance (limited to US$45 million) and the US Federal Government’s Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund reimbursed Owners for an additional US$88 million in clean-up costs. Owners and the US Federal Government filed suit against voyage charterers for breach of the ASBATANKVOY charterparty safe berth clause. The case went through two trials, and before the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit twice, before the Supreme Court were asked to determine ultimate liability. The question before the Court was whether the safe berth clause was a warranty of safety, which meant that liability for an unsafe berth would be imposed on voyage charterers irrespective of whether they exercised due diligence. The answer to that question was yes; the language of the safe berth clause in this case was unambiguous and unqualified. The obligation on the voyage charterers was to designate a berth that was free from harm or risk such that the vessel come and go from always safely afloat. The Court went on to comment that “charterers remain free to contract around unqualified language that would otherwise establish a warranty of safety, by expressly limiting the extent of their obligations or liability. In the absence of any such qualifying language however the Supreme Court has made it clear that a charterer is liable to the owner for any consequences arising out of the ship being ordered to an unsafe berth, an obligation unfettered by any issues of due diligence or the degree of knowledge on the part of the charterer.
Baatz, Y.: Maritime Law. Informa Law from Routledge (2020).
Burtchaell, R.A.I.: Paved with Good Intentions: The Supreme Court’s Plain Meaning Approach in CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. v. Frescati Shipping Co. Tulane Maritime Law Journal. 45, 443 (2020).
Han, N.-H., Kim, E.-J.: A Study on the Implied Terms of Safe Berth under Voyage Charterparty. Journal of Korea Port Economic Association. 26, 3, 92–113 (2010).
Hartman, P.G.: Safe Port/Berth Clauses: Warranty or Due Diligence. Tulane Maritime Law Journal. 21, 53 (1996).
Hawkins, D.: Breach of Contract Warranty Safe-berth Clause. Wisconsin Law Journal. (2020).
Hurley, J.N., Walker, C.M.: Charter Parties: Safe Harbor Warranty and Cargo Liabilities. Journal of Transportation Law, Logistics, and Policy. 80, 4, 255–268 (2013).
Jarvis, R.: What is the Meaning of a “Safe Berth” Clause in a Charter Party? Preview of United States Supreme Court Cases. 47, 13–16 (2019).
Maass, D.R.: The Safe-Berth Warranty and Its Critics. Tulane Maritime Law Journal. 39, 317 (2014).
Paré Jr, A.M.: The Safe Port/Safe Berth Warranty and Comparative Fault. Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce. 45, 141 (2014).
Rubin, S.: Safe Port and Berth Provisions in Time Charter Agreements: Apportioning Liability to Deter Accidents and Minimize Costs. University of Miami Law Review. 36, 3, 465 (1982).
Smith Jr, J.: Time and Voyage Charters: Safe Port/Safe Berth. Tulane Law Review. 49, 860 (1974).
Weintrit, A., Neumann, T.: Miscellaneous problems in maritime navigation, transport & shipping introduction. Transport Systems and Processes: Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. 1 (2011). - doi:10.1201/b11347-4
Zhang, Y.: Case Note on Citgo Asphalt Refining Co. v. Frescati Shipping Co., 140 S. Ct. 1081 (2020). Oil and Gas, Natural Resources, and Energy Journal. 7, 1, 43 (2021).
Citation note:
Boviatsis M., Daniil G.: Legal Analysis of the U.S. Supreme Court Position Upon a Safe Berth Warranty and Evaluation of the UK Legal Position. TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, Vol. 16, No. 1, doi:10.12716/1001.16.01.01, pp. 27-32, 2022

Other publications of authors:

File downloaded 141 times

Important: TransNav.eu cookie usage
The TransNav.eu website uses certain cookies. A cookie is a text-only string of information that the TransNav.EU website transfers to the cookie file of the browser on your computer. Cookies allow the TransNav.eu website to perform properly and remember your browsing history. Cookies also help a website to arrange content to match your preferred interests more quickly. Cookies alone cannot be used to identify you.
Akceptuję pliki cookies z tej strony